“The legal saga lasts approximately nine years” – Kommersant FM

Kommersant FM columnist Dmitry Butkevich talks about the verdict the jury made in the lawsuit of Russian businessman Dmitry Rybolovlev.

A New York jury, after three weeks of incredibly detailed testimony, acquitted Sotheby’s of aiding and abetting fraud charges brought by Russian billionaire Dmitry Rybolovlev.

The businessman claimed that the auction house conspired with the Swiss dealer Yves Bouvier to sell him, Rybolovlev, four works – Leonardo da Vinci, Gustav Klimt, Rene Magritte and Amedeo Modigliani – at inflated prices. In general, the legal saga lasts about nine years, from the beginning of 2015, when Rybolovlev initiated a lawsuit against Bouvier, claiming that he inflated prices for works of art in general by more than $2 billion. According to the plaintiff, the markups crossed the line of accepted market norms and went beyond into the area of ​​fraud.

According to the artnet portal, when the jury’s decision was announced, there was no reaction in the hall. Rybolovlev, who had appeared a few minutes earlier, was quiet and showed no emotion on the way out of court.

It is curious that towards the end of his testimony, when the businessman’s own lawyer asked him why his extensive business experience did not give him the opportunity to uncover Bouvier’s alleged fraud, Rybolovlev replied that the art dealer “behaves in a way that gives him credibility.” And then he got emotional, stopped, put his hand to his forehead and wiped his eyes before declaring that Bouvier seemed like part of his family. “I’m not a person who trusts easily,” Rybolovlev’s words.

After the verdict, Sotheby’s lead attorney Markus Asner told Artnet News: “We are delighted with the verdict. It was a long ordeal for Sotheby’s, but it is encouraging that in the end we were vindicated.”

Dmitry Rybolovlev’s lawyer Daniel Kornstein told Kommersant FM: “This trial has shed light on the critical lack of transparency in the art market. Such secrecy made it extremely difficult to prove a complex case of aiding and abetting fraud. This verdict only underscores the need for reform outside the courtroom.”